Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
20 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Stevens v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Thus, “[w]hen Goff was charged with capital murder, he was put on notice that the death penalty might result, what aggravating factors might be used, and the mens rea standard that was required.” Id. (citing Stevens v. State, 867 So. 2d 219, 227 (Miss. 2003)). ¶89. 2015Thus, “[w]hen Goff was charged with capital murder, he was put on notice that the death penalty might result, what aggravating factors might be used, and the mens rea standard that was required.” Id. (citing Stevens v. State, 867 So.2d 219, 227 (Miss.2003)). ¶ 89. | 8 | 8 |
Goff v. Stategreen2 sentences2018Goff , 14 So.3d at 665 (¶ 173). 2014Moreover, “[w]hen [Corrothers] was charged with capital murder, he was put on notice that the death penalty might result, what aggravating factors might be used, and the mens rea standard that was required.” See Goff v. State, 14 So.3d 625, 665 (Miss.2009). | 6 | 6 |
Pitchford v. Stategreen2 sentences2017Pitchford, 45 So. 3d at 258 (¶ 184) (quoting Goff v. State, 14 So. 3d 625, 665 (¶¶ 174-77) (Miss. 2009) (citations omitted)). 2017Pitchford , 45 So.3d at 258 (¶ 184) (quoting Goff v. State , 14 So.3d 625 , 665 (¶¶ 174-77) (Miss. 2009) (citations omitted)). | 2 | 2 |
Renfrow v. Stategreen2 sentences2017We held that “[b]y including that language, the State imposed a mens rea requirement, and it was obligated to prove that aspect of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 625 (¶19). 2012In Renfrow v. State, 34 So.3d 617, 625 (¶ 19) (Miss.Ct.App.2009), this Court held that the indictment at issue imposed a mens rea requirement since it contained language that included an allegation of willfulness. | 2 | 2 |
Spicer v. Stategreen2 sentences2010This Court specifically addressed this issue in Spicer v. State, 921 So.2d 292, 319 (Miss.2006), in which it explained: This Court has previously rejected the argument made by [the defendant] [that his death penalty sentence must be vacated because the indictment failed to include a statutory aggravating factor or the mens rea standard required for capital murder]. 2007This Court specifically addressed this issue in Spicer v. State, 921 So. 2d 292, 319 (Miss. 2006), in which it explained: This Court has previously rejected the argument made by [the defendant] [that his death penalty sentence must be vacated because the indictment failed to include a statutory aggravating factor or the mens rea standard required for capital murder]. | 2 | 2 |
Brown v. Stategreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Brown, v. State, 890 So.2d 901, 918 (Miss.2004); Stevens v. State, 867 So.2d 219, 225-27 (Miss. 2003). 2007See, e.g., Brown v. State, 890 So. 2d 901, 918 (Miss. 2004); Stevens v. State, 867 So. 2d 219, 225-27 (Miss. 2003). | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Allan Ray Hattaway, Thomas Stimac, Robert George Burroughs, and Marty Currangreen1 sentence2019United States v. Hattaway , 740 F.2d 1419 , 1428 (7th Cir. 1984) ("The defendant's knowledge of whether a state line has been crossed thus is irrelevant to whether he has violated the Mann Act ...."). ¶21. | 1 | 1 |
Brawner v. Stategreen1 sentence2014“The State is correct in its assertion that a defendant is not entitled to formal notice of the aggravating circumstances to be employed by the prosecution and that an indictment for capital murder puts a defendant on sufficient notice to what statutory aggravating factors will be used against him.” Brawner v. State, 947 So.2d 254, 265 (Miss.2006). | 1 | 1 |
Starns v. Stategreen1 sentence2003See Stevens, 867 So. 2d 227 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Staples v. United States
green
2 sentences2024“The mens rea presumption requires knowledge only of the facts that make the defendant’s conduct illegal[.]” Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 , 622 n.3, 114 S. Ct. 1793 , 128 L. 2024“The mens rea presumption requires knowledge only of the facts that make the defendant’s conduct illegal[.]” Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 , 622 n.3, 114 S. Ct. 1793 , 128 L. | 2 | 2023–2024 |
Kansas v. Marsh
green
2 sentences2015Ronk also argues that this Court’s holdings in Goff and other similar cases are incorrect in light of the United States Supreme Court’s more recent holding in Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163 , 126 S.Ct. 2516 , 165 L.Ed.2d 429 (2006). -In Marsh , the United States Supreme Court reversed the Kansas Supreme Court’s ruling that Kansas’s death penalty statute was unconstitutional. 2015Ronk also argues that this Court’s holdings in Goff and other similar cases are incorrect in light of the United States Supreme Court’s more recent holding in Kansas v. Marsh, 548 U.S. 163 , 126 S.Ct. 2516 , 165 L.Ed.2d 429 (2006). -In Marsh , the United States Supreme Court reversed the Kansas Supreme Court’s ruling that Kansas’s death penalty statute was unconstitutional. | 2 | 2015–2015 |
Apprendi v. New Jersey
green
2 sentences2009In support of this argument, Goff cites Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 , 122 S.Ct. 2428 , 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002). ¶ 174. 2009In support of this argument, Goff cites Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 , 122 S.Ct. 2428 , 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002). ¶ 174. | 2 | 2005–2009 |
Luna Torres v. Lynch
green
1 sentence2019Id. at 1630-31 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Ring v. Arizona
green
2 sentences2009In support of this argument, Goff cites Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 , 122 S.Ct. 2428 , 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002). ¶ 174. 2009In support of this argument, Goff cites Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584 , 122 S.Ct. 2428 , 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002). ¶ 174. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.